image: Левиафан (2014)
I like how this one starts with “imagine a world where there are no rules”.
DISCLAIMER: I will try and formulate why the presentation of many of history’s scholars is a big effort of fraud on the modern students and masses.
If Hobbes weren’t an atheist, and would have paved his way to some occult secret society, the church of satan would welcome him with open arms.
First of all, This scholar is, by definition, a materialist.
Meaning that his views are a-priori limited, if not to say unaccurate.
By all means, try to get familiar with THE HERMETIC PRINCIPLES.
Second, we can note that he had suffered some sort of a childhood trauma regarding his father issues during his development as a child.
This is not a strawman motion, this is relevant.
Hobbes developed a cautious character, and a Pacifist worldview.
Mix all we gathered up to this point with a somewhat Darwinian/Deterministic position towards nature; wherein self preservation is the highest goal of any individual species, all the while denying the existence of some kind of order, a god.
This is all actually a satanic virtue– viewing humankind as not at all different from another animal on planet earth. Actually, Dark occultists are not at all agreeing to this notion towards themselves, but they are propagating this worldview to their slaves.
“life in the state of nature is nasty, brutish and short”
Yes, I believe you have all noticed that we currently exist in a very chaotic environment, thank you, Thomas. Sadly, this whole perversion is his trying to remain in this state of affairs:
Moral Relativism X STATISM
Essentially, T.H. substitutes his “atheistic” god with a man made ruler, a “leviathan”.
Hobbes’ notion is that an authority is deemed in power and is, in reality, legitimate, so long as it does not threaten the very lives of the subjects.
Use your imagination a minute. THIS IS CALLED SLAVERY.
You cannot delegate a right you don’t have to someone else and authorize their actions as legitimate. This is a deeply perverted view on how morality basically works.
“CONTRACTS” are the supposed agreement between humans that allow for civilization. [Civilization, in my understanding, is the common reference to a culture that has given up on arms.] What it actually is, economically speaking, is a trade value per item;
If you value this item more than me, it allows me to charge you extra for it.
Not only this disqualifies subordinate help and synarchy, it devalues the fact any violent action would cause a pending, dooming effect.
“It is not wisdom but Authority that makes a law.”
“humane affairs cannot be without inconvenience”
talk about determinism, heh?
No god, you say?
“…No man that hath sovereign power can justly be put to death, or otherwise in any manner by his subjects punished. For seeing every subject is author of the actions of his sovereign, he punishes another for the actions committed by himself.”
At last, we see the contradiction. In order for the contract to be valid, both agreeing sides must be FREE. A vague definition in this case.
But everything conscious is free. Everything Sentient is free. It just is.
Enslavement is not impossible, but it is unlikely in a sober mind.
My hope is that I drew a vivid picture as to why Hobbes’ sophism is a tainted, murky substance of promoted satanism in disguise.
[[By the way, The arguer does not see the problem with having more than one authority. How come we have not one, but many states on our planet?]]
And why would you change “god given” authority to the level of “contract with the people” type of authority rule? Or do you still believe that the people wanted it this way?
[[What, they suppose it all comes down to some ancient, long forgotten dispute between two tribes or something? Again, fear-driven chaos.]]